




<£?^y* -#r 4^|jj3> 


VACCINATION 


I 

ft* 

i 

*•.;;• 

II 


II 

✓<0rC0«Gftf& 
/T#.,ft RIGHT. SP\.- 

A? 1 0** . . , 

AUO I 





K 


•M j 




“Kvery good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree 
^ugfth forth evil fruit.” Matthew vii, 17th. 

c / w w - 

o J ~ 

C. W. Aruerige, AV D. 




Wl 

m 

m 


Sft 

I® 

& 

I® 

r> :; 


m 

If 

Sift 


V”** 

M 


m 

m 


Price, lO cents 









. 

■ ' - - ■ 1 

* l y . i k t 'v f i . 41 f - # * . •* ^ \ 7 • . » • * % h 


/ 











' A :' “ ki 








xl\U t 












**, > 


•.?: V S7_; 

A 4 ; 








\ * 


1 \ ■ylWsMs:: 


r 




.. < X-.. •• • *< t'*: wri . V- 


.*■ ,-t; 















> '< i u 






■ 



















































































« 






iffi; .-.A » 


















■r ■ ' 




/ 



S:U 5 jjj 




fejf: 

'■IllSIlIf ■o«b®**** 


HSHi 

^*«SSB8a«"'::s“:K:”. 

:: i 






PREFACE. 


The following pages have been written for the purpose 
of calling the attention of thinking people to the custom of 
vaccinaton, the custom of such foul origin and dire results 
that it is a mystery why the practice has not been legally 
forbidden, instead of legally enforced, among a free and 
enlightened people. 

That Jenner’s theories regarding vaccination should have 
been accepted by the credulous and superstitious of his day, 
is not a matter of surprise. A long period of inoculation 
had preceded him; and smallpox was the one disease most 
dreaded by the people, not only because of its fatality, but 
because of the disfigurement. Jenner promised exemption 
from the disease and its consequences, and was hailed as an 
inventor, and lauded and rewarded as a benefactor. It is 
true that there was timely,and appropriate opposition to the 
absurd 'claim and practice, but royalty espoused the cause of 
Jenner and opposition was silenced; truth was crucified and 
error glorified. 

The system has doubtless caused more misery and mor¬ 
tality since its introduction by Jenner in 1798, than that 
caused by war, pestilence and famine; and could the dead 
‘speak, they would denounce the unclean thing in such une¬ 
quivocal terms as would cause vaccinators to hide their heads 
in shame. 

The record here offered is but a small portion of that 
•which could be produced, while by far the larger portion of 
the testimony has been buried from earthly sight. Silent to 
earth, the record will become vocal in the great hereafter, to 
the confusion of those who have participated in this great 
crime against bodily purity, or willingly suffered it to con¬ 
tinue u’nrebuked. 

C. W. AMERIGE, M. D., 


18 Vernon Street, 


Springfieed, Mass. 






THE CUSTOM OF VACCINATION. 


It has often been said that if we trace back to its origin, 
the true history of any one of the “learned professions,” as 
they are popularly called, we shall find them to be an out¬ 
growth from theories and dogmas, which the discoveries of 
modern scientific researches have proven to be baseless, 
illogical, and in manyinstances pernicious; and no well in¬ 
formed and fair-minded physician will claim that the Medical 
Profession is an exception to the general rule. 

The late venerated and honored Professor of Anatomy, 
in the Medical School of Harvard University,—Dr. Oliver 
Wendell Holmes,—while speaking of the popular “system of 
medicine,” as practiced by the past and, to a large extent, by 
the present generation, once said:—“If the entire materia 
medica were thrown into the sea, it would be all the better 
for humanity, and all the worse for the fishes.” 

11 is true that this remark was not specially applied to 
our subject,—“The Custom of Vaccination,” but it goes far 
to prove the necessity of new schools of therapeutics, founded 
upon modern science, which shall discard all baseless theories 
and dogmas, and raise itself above the venality of those 
vested interests, which have so long preyed upon the credu¬ 
lity of an innocent and long suffering people instead of lead¬ 
ing them to those higher lights which science has prepared 
for the receptive mind. 

Of all professional dogmas of the past or present, none 
have wrought greater physical injury to the human race than 
the theory and practice of vaccination. This is a broad 
statement but it is amply proven by the dire experiences of 
the past. 

I am well aware that there is still a very large class of 
practitioners who are so infatuated with the emoluments and 
mysteries of Jennerism that they have hardened themselves 
against all proof of resultant injuries to their patients and to 
their feljowmen. 


4 


One typical case of this mental or moral obtuseness may 
answer for all and is here mentioned only because the party 
was a lecturer on physiology and hygiene in one of our 
“Medical Schools” (?) and used his official position to uphold 
the exploded theories of vaccination. 

In a communication to a popular magazine, this profes¬ 
sor publicly asks for “even one fact, showing that "the blood 
of the race had been corrupted by vaccination.” 

Ignorance of the fundamental principles of health, may 
be the result of a lack of mental capacity rather than limited 
reading, but no advocate of vaccination has the moral right 
to plead ignorance of those historic facts which have been 
abundant, from the days of Jenner’s personal experiences, to 
the present time. These facts, though often suppressed by 
pro-vaccinators, have always been accessible to honest inves¬ 
tigators. 

The experiences of this life have shown to those who 
think, that whenever there has been profit in the promulga¬ 
tion of theories, and loss in the statement of facts, avarice 
has but too often overruled conscience and controlled the 
individual. 

Dr. George W. Winterburn, of New York, in his valuable 
work on vaccination says he has “found the densest ignorence 
among those who ought to be familiar with the facts relating 
to this subject,” and adds that, “Out of some two hundred of 
the profession, to whom he had put the question, only two 
had read the works of Jenner.” 

It will be found to be true that there are many physicians 
who can talk flippantly of blood-poisoning, who become 
dumb when confronted with facts proving that the contami¬ 
nation was the direct result of vaccination and the work of 
their own hands. 

Before proceeding further, let us be sure of our premises. 
Let us inquire into the origin and cause of the malady. 

The affection, popularly known as smallpox is supposed 
to be pre-historic in its origin. We only know that it was 
introduced into Europe from Asia, more than 1,000 years 
ago and that its most prominent inducing cause seems to be 
constitutional impairment and filthy environment. Hence it 
will be understood that perfect health and cleanliness are the 


5 


best and only safeguards against the encroachments of this 
disease as well as of kindred zymotic disorders. 

One thousand years ago the true nature of the disease 
was a profound mystery, even to the best educated classes. 
The people of those days had been accustomed to meet ene¬ 
mies which could be seen, and perhaps, overcome by courage 
and physical force; but here was an invisible foe whose pro¬ 
gress legions could not control and there is little wonder that 
it struck terror to the hearts of men and nations. In an evil 
hour, some one conceived the idea that by inoculating an 
individual before he had taken the smallpox, .with the pus 
exuded from the pustules on those who were suffering from 
the disease, the violence of the engrafted disease would be 
greatly modified. It was even claimed that the process was 
perfectly harmless and the angel of death was thus complete¬ 
ly foiled in his work of destruction. 

We now wonder how such an absurd theory could have 
been accepted and acted upon, and how even the most cred¬ 
ulous, could have been persuaded to surrender the sanctuary 
of the healthy body to the certainty of foul pollution upon 
such shallow and unfounded assumptions. 

The people however, were not only ignorant and credu¬ 
lous, but they were also panic-stricken, and they submitted 
to the process of inoculation, which was then very appropri- 
atley called “engrafting”, without questioning the authority 
or veracity of the mercenary ignorance of the self-constituted 
guardians of health. 

In the year 1721, Lady Mary Wortly Montagu, wife of 
the English Ambassador to the Ottoman Court, became infatu¬ 
ated with the promises of the advocates of the “engrafting” 
theories; caused her own children to be inoculated and sub¬ 
sequently became actively engaged in the introduction of the 
custom into England, and for more than one hundred years 
this diabolical practice of spreading smallpox by engrafting 
the disease into bodies not affected, was quite general with 
the English people. It took several generations of expe¬ 
rience to convince the people that the process of engrafting 
had no other effect than to increase the death-rate; the num¬ 
ber of smallpox cases, and cause a general physical degener¬ 
ation which threatened to depopulate whole districts. 


6 


As years rolled on the evils of inoculation became more 
and more apparent and could no longer be ignored by the 
government, but it became necessary to enact laws making 
inoculation a penal offence in several European countries be¬ 
fore the misguided people could be made to understand that 
their system of engrafting disease into a healthy person was 
a crime against the laws of life and health and the mercenary 
practitioners compelled to discontinue their nefarious prac¬ 
tices. 

In the year 1798, Dr. Edward Jenner, called public 
attention to his theories regarding vaccination. He called 
them facts. 

The times were propitious; sanitation was almost un¬ 
known; zymotic affectations unchecked; therapeutics, an 
empty sound; ignorance and superstition prevailed; reason 
was baffled before the mystery of disease, and credulity was 
the servant of charlitanism. He who held the word of prom¬ 
ise to the ear of hope was not asked for . proof. Jenner 
asserted that “ The person who had been thus affected , (by his 
system of vaccination,) was forever after secure from the in¬ 
fection of smallpox!' 

Let us now enquire into this wonderful system for which 
so much was claimed. 

The word vaccina is from “vacca,” a cow, and was 
adopted to indicate cowpox, and Jenner laid special stress 
upon the necessity of using only the cowpox virus. He also 
announced that there was no such thing as spontaneous cow- 
pox, as he well knew that the disease was communicated to 
the udder of milch cows, by the filthy hands of men who had 
been engaged in grooming horses suffering from the disease 
called “grease;” and it is not known that the disease ever 
originated in any other way. It is not recognized as a con¬ 
stitutional bovine disease, and bulls have never been known 
to have it. 

Cows suffering from this disease often communicated it 
to milkmaids through some scratch, or other perforations 
of the skin of the hands, and it became a matter of country 
gossip that those who had been thus affected were less liable 
to an attack of smallpox during an epidemic. This country 
gossip came to the ears of Jenner in 1768, who was then act- 


ing as a surgeon’s apprentice. It was nearly twenty years 
later that he made his first experiment on a youth named 
James Phipps, who subsequently died of pulmonary consump¬ 
tion, and thus became the first victim of Jenner’s system for 
blood poisoning. 

Jenner also vaccinated his own son who also died of 
pulmonary consumption. After vaccinating his son with cow - 
pox Jenner inoculated him with smallpox lymph and it was 
said that the disease “did not take.” This was claimed to be 
proof of the prophylactic power of the cowpox lymph. But 
it only proved the well known fact that whenever one well 
defined disease, of fatal characteristics, has become thoroughly 
established in the human system, its course is seldom changed 
by other disorders, although the malific influence of the sec¬ 
ond. disease may increase the violence of the one already in 
full possession and control. 

Early in the experiments of Jenner, we find that two of . 
his partients died of pulmonary consumption. To the scientist 
who sought for the truth, this would have been ample proof 
of the natural result of the filthy practice, but Jenner only 
proclaimed the fact that these patients did not die of small¬ 
pox. All other considerations were entirely ignored by him, 
and the general public were kept in ignorance. These facts 
however become very significant when we learn the true 
nature of the horse disease called “grease,” which is the 
origin of the true Jennerian virus. In fact Jenner frequently 
used the virus just as it was taken from the heels of the horse 
and he strongly urged that there could be “no protection 
against smallpox in any system of vaccination, where the 
ichor had not this origin.” 

To correctly estimate the true character of Jenner’s prac¬ 
tices it will be necessary to enquire into the special nature of 
the manifestations in the heels of the horse called “grease.” 
Veterinary surgeons inform us that it is not a local, but a con¬ 
stitutional disease, and often the direct result of a lack of 
due care and proper feeding. Dr. Collins, possessing the 
true instincts of the scientist, was not satisfied with anything 
less than demonstration, and in order to learn the facts in the 
case, made an examination of a horse which had been 
slaughtered because he was in the last stages of the disease 
called “grease.” 


The doctor describes the post-mortem appearance as fol¬ 
lows: ist. “There was a general anemic look of the body, 
wasting of the tissues, an unusual thickening or fullness of the 
lymphatic glands.” 2nd. “Lips, tongue and gums, covered 
with peculiar cankerous-looking ulcers, and much swollen; 
the whole mucous membrane was much softened and covered 
with livid spots; ulceration of the larynx and trachea; lungs 
highly congested, and cavities ramifying through the sub¬ 
stance of the organ, filled with purulent matter, correspond 
ing in every particular, both in fetor and character, to that 
exuding from the greasy heels, and which is seen in the last 
stages of consumption in human subjects.” 

These facts lead us irresistibly to certain conclusions. 

1 st. That Jenner’s theories were not the result of scien¬ 
tific investigations, but were founded upon the gossip of an 
ignorant and superstitious peasantry. 

2 nd. That lymph taken from the heels of a diseased 
horse and introduced into the veins of human subjects, con- ’ 
veys the identical disease with which the animal was suffer¬ 
ing, modified only by the physical condition of the human 
subject, and the passing of the same lymph through the 
medium of a cow can only result in adding to the virus from 
an equine disease, the virus from a bovine affection. The 
result cannot be other than evil. “We do not gather figs 
from thistles.” 

In this connection it may be well to mention the fact 
that whenever and wherever gangrenous, animal matter, or 
toxic vegetable substances are thrust into the circulation of 
the human system, disease must sooner or later result there¬ 
from; the special manifestation of which is usually characteris¬ 
tic of the matter thus introduced but such foreign matter may, 
and often does co-operate with special morbid conditions of 
the body injured, in the promotion of some disease, other 
than that represented by the matter introduced; when two 
poisons meet in the human system, the one for which condi¬ 
tions are found to be most favorable will prevail, while the 
other becomes a “silent partner,” as it were, in the work of 
destruction. 

If the investigator desires to secure facts regarding 
blood-poisoning by vaccination, he need go no further than 


9 


the history of Jenner’s first case; that of James Phipps, into 
whose veins Jenner forced the rotten pus, taken from the 
heels of a horse dying from a disease unknown to Jenner, but 
which Dr. Collins has shown to be “pulmonary consumption.” 
Dr. Collins however is not alone in his opinion regarding the 
true nature of the equine disease called “grease.” 

If we consult the Veterinary Surgeons, they will tell us 
that Glanders, Farcy and Grease, are but three varieties of 
the same disease, and that they are the equine equivalent for 
the scrofulous or tuberculous affections in man, and their 
sequel, consumption. 

We have been told that “In the multitude of counsel 
there is safety.” Let us now enquire into the opinions of a 
few of those eminent men who have had special opportunities 
to see, and special training by which to enable them to judge 
correctly of the legitimate effect of vaccination. 

Alexander Wilder, Editor of the New York Medical 
Times, and Professor of Physiology in the United States 
Medical College of New York, in his pamphlet on vaccination 
says: “It is the infusion of a contaminating element into the 
system, and after such contamination you can never hope to 
regain the former purity of the body; thus tainted, the body 
is made liable to a host of ailments. Consumption follows 
in the footsteps of vaccination as certainly and as unequivo¬ 
cally as effect follows cause, and wherever it is common to 
vaccinate, scrofula and tuberculosis are general.” In England, 
after vaccination became general, and during the twelve 
years between 1853 and 1865, there was an increase of deaths 
from consumption of about 230,000, over the preceding twelve 
years; and during the same period, there was an increase of 
100,000 deaths from measles, scarletina, whooping cough 
and croup. 

The Medical Times and Gazette of January 1st, 1854, 
acknowledges that “consumption had widely spread since the 
introduction of vaccination; and during the preceding ten 
years had slain in the metropolis alone, upwards of 68,000.” 

Professor Bartlett of the New York Medical University 
furnishes some very significant facts which had been brought 
to his knowledge regarding the death of 303 children. Out 
of this number, ?o8 had been vaccinated, 138 of which, died 


10 


of tubercular consumption and 70 of other maladies. Of the 
95 children that had not been vaccinated, only thirty died o f 
tubercular consumption and 65 of other diseases. 

Such testimony as this clearly proves the statement of 
Dr. Wilder that “consumption follows in the footsteps of 
vaccination as certainly and unequivocally as effect follows 
cause.” The law is irrevocable that:—“The seed bringeth 
forth fruit after its kind.” 

Compilers of Dictionaries but seldom assume the respon¬ 
sibility of recording facts or opinions in opposition to popular 
professional dogmas. It is not their office to lead, but to 
define, and we may therefore feel assured that whenever such 
opinions are expressed, they are the result of carefully con¬ 
sidered, cumulative testimony. 

We find the following in Copeland’s Medical Dictionary: 
“It is certain that scrofular and tubercular diseases have 
increased since the introduction of cowpox.” 

If there is any disease more dreaded than consumption, 
it is syphilis. Let us now enquire what vaccination has done 
for the perpetuation of this most disgusting disorder. 

In a lecture delivered in Paris, France, in 1862, Professor 
Ricord said:—“If ever the transmission of disease with vaccine 
lymph is clearly demonstrated, vaccination must be altogether 
discontinued , for in the present state of science, we are in 
possession of no criterion which may permit the conscientious 
practitioner to assert that the lymph with which he inoculates 
is perfectly free from admixture .” In May, 1863, he announc¬ 
ed from the same platform, his convictions that the charges 
of transmission of disease had been proven in the following 
language:—“At first I repelled the idea that syphilis could 
be transmitted by vaccination, but to-day I hesitate no more 
to proclaim their reality.” 

The strangest part of this testimony from the learned 
doctor, is that he did not see from the first, that the essential 
feature of vaccination is “transmission,” that the only point 
of difference between the pro-vaccinator and the anti-vacci¬ 
nator, is regarding the nature of the matter, and the result 
of its transmission. To the anti-vaccinator, it is a self-evident 
fact that the “matter” is a malignant poison , which “transmits” 
malignant diseases . 


I 


It is no answer to this statement to say all who are 
vaccinated do not immediately succumb to disease. Once in 
the system, the poison may work secretly, but none the less 
surely, and sooner or later, will find a weak point through 
which it may increase the sufferings and lessen the days of 
those who have been subjected to this process of blood- 
pollution. 

There may be something yet to learn from the Chrono- 
thermalists. We know diseases have peroids of intermission; 
that the quiescent peroid has no fixed limit of duration; that 
certain diseases have a tendency to revisit or redevelop in 
former subjects; that injected poisons do not always act with 
accustomed celerity, but rest as it were, for a convenient 
season in which to prove their destructive power. Instances 
are recorded in which persons bitten by rabid dogs, (Is this 
caninjp inoculation?) have suffered no inconvenience there¬ 
from until, in the weaknesses of latter years, the quiescent 
poison found its opportunity for malignant activity and caus¬ 
ing death from rabies. 

Dr. Wilder, whose New York practice gave ample oppor¬ 
tunity for ascertaining facts and judging effects, has express¬ 
ed the opinion that: “Syphilis appears oftener as a result of 
vaccination than from contagion otherwise encountered.” 

The Vaccination Inquirer and Health Review, printed 
in London, reports the fact that: “Fifty-eight French sol¬ 
diers were vaccinated in December 1880, by the regimental 
doctor, the lymph being taken from a Spanish child, and in a 
few days all of the fifty-eight, without exception, were 
infected with syphilis.” 

Dr. Bamberger, of Warsberg, mentions a case in which 
syphilis was communicated by vaccination, for which the 
practitioner was found guilty by a Court of Justice and con¬ 
demned to prison for several months. 

Dr. Cerioli, reports that: “In 1841, a child born of 
syphilitic parents, but which was apparently healthy, was 
used to provide lymph to vaccinate sixty-four persons, who 
were^aJl syphilized. From which eight children and two 
women died.” 

In the London Lancet, of November 16th, 1861, there is 
an account of forty-six children who were syphilized by vac- 



12 


cination, again on the 15th day of December, 1866, the 
“Lancet” mentions another instance of thirty children syphi- 
lized by vaccination, the lymph being procured from the 
medical authorities. 

The “Siglo Medica,” a Spanish Medical Journal, printed 
in 1865, publishes statistics which show that out of three 
hundred and four vaccinations, two hundred and twenty-four 
were syphilized. 

The “Rivalta cases” in Italy, are well known. In those 
cases, the virus was taken from an infant supposed to be 
healthy. From this one child, forty-six children were vac¬ 
cinated and one of the forty-six furnished lymph, with which 
seventeen others were vaccinated. Of the total number of 
sixty-three children, forty-four were infected with syphilis, 
and in turn communicated it to their mothers and nurses. 

These cases were investigated by Dr. Henry Lee, a well 
known authority on syphilis, who said he “Could come to no 
other conclusion, than that the disease was communicated 
by vaccination.” 

In a pamphlet published by Prof. Joseph Jones, of Nash¬ 
ville, Tennessee, in 1867, he records the sworn testimony of 
a large number of eminent physicians, showing that hundreds 
of soldiers in the confederate armies had died of syphilis and 
gangrene, caused by vaccination. 

“The Confederate States Medical Journal,” published in 
1864, reported several cases of syphilis which resulted from 
vaccination. 

Dr. M. Depaul, Chief of the Vaccination Service of the 
French Academy of Medicine, reports vaccinal syphilis which 
resulted in the infection of one hundred and sixty children. 

In testifying before the English Parliamentary Commit¬ 
tee in 1871, Dr. Pierce said he had twenty cases of transferred 
syphilis within four years, the lymph being supplied from the 
Royal Jennerian Institution. 

Dr. Hutchinson testified that he had made the subject of 
syphilis a specialty and was therefore able to detect indica¬ 
tions of that disease which might escape the notice of other 
medical men, and that he “had seen eleven cases of syphilitic 
contagion through vaccination.” 


13 

Dr. Hitchman, of Liverpool, in an article published in 
the December number of the “Anti-Vaccinator,” in the year 
1872, in speaking of certain ulcers said: “They owe their dis¬ 
gusting origin to the foul exudations of that indefinite, name¬ 
less, hideous thing, now in active propagation throughout the 
land, yclept-syphilis.” 

In 1874, Prof. Trousseau, of Paris, France, wrote the 
“Clinique Medicale,” a medical journal published in France: 
“The transmission of syphilis by vaccination appears now to 
be an established fact.” 

In 1878, Prof. German, in an address to the Diet of the 
German empire, said: “Above all, the direful fatality, which 
lately occurred at Lebus, would alone warrant the abolition 
of the vaccination laws. Eighteen school girls, averaging 
twelve years of age, were re-vaccinated and thereby syphilized, 
and some of them died. Yet the lymph, the syphilitic lymph, 
was obtained from the Official Royal Establishment, and was 
the new regenerated or “animalized” vacine lymph, so warm¬ 
ly recommended for the re-vaccination of schools.” 

The report of the German Vaccination Commission of 
1884 contains the following significant sentence: “Up to 
1880, fifty cases have become known in which syphilis inocu¬ 
lated with vaccine virus, caused illness to about seven hun¬ 
dred and fifty persons .” 

In the month of December, 1880, fifty-eight recruits of 
4th, Regiment of Zouaves, stationed at Algiers, vaccinated 
and syphilized, and after terrible suffering, thirty died. Re¬ 
garding this case, Dr. Emile Bertherand, Editor of the Journal 
of Medicine and of Pharmacy, Algiers, says:—“I have seen 
the infected youths; and the cause of their misery is undispu¬ 
ted. 

In the report of the “Proceedings of the Academy of 
Medicine,” Paris, Bulletine number 31, August 6th, 1889, 
there is an account of five children vaccinated and infected 
with ulcerous syphilis. 

It is not nescessary to devote further space to the proof 
of the transmission by vaccination, of this most disgusting 
and malignant disorder. Let us now devote a few moments 
to the consideration of general results of vaccination. In this 
field of observation we shall find ample authority for the 


H 


remark of Dr. Winterburn; that: “Medical men are no better, 
and never have been any better, than the public demand; and 
the surest, the most reasonable, nay the only way to raise the 
standard of professional character and achievment is through 
the demands made by an intelligent and exacting public.” 

This has the true ring of professional integrity. Here 
is no attempt to pander to special, vested and private interests 
at the public expense. The practitioner who deserves the 
respect or patronage of the public, offers moral, intellectual 
and social worth, as an equivalent for regard and confidence; 
and genuine service for patronage. 

That eminent and learned scientist, Alexander von Hum¬ 
boldt, who understood the manifold evils which arise from 
tainted blood, once said:—“I have clearly perceived the pro¬ 
gressive, dangerous influence of vaccination in England,' 
France and Germany.” 

It will be seen that this prophecy has been more than 
fulfilled if we examine the statistics, which at a late hour, are 
being gathered on the subject, notwithstanding the deter¬ 
mined opposition of the pro-vaccinators. For these statistics 
we have but little space, therefore must allow a few general 
quotations to tell the tale and expose the facts of Jennerism. 
The pain and suffering resulting therefrom is beyond the 
power of word or pen to depict and must be left to the imag¬ 
ination of the reader. 

Dr. Winterburn, heretofore quoted, has said: “Vital sta¬ 
tistics, gathered from every quarter of the globe, establishes 
the fact, that smallpox, like other zymoses, originates from 
unsanitary modes of life and cannot be effectually conquered 
but by removing the cause.” 

Like other filth diseases, smallpox requires congenial 
soil. It feeds upon and is nourished by filth; lacking this, it 
would cease to exist. 

This does not necessarily imply that external surround¬ 
ings must be unsanitary, although they do exert a power for 
evil. It is the impurities within the system which attracts 
and supports zymosis; and Jennerism, by its practices of 
infusing filth into the human system, has done more to pro¬ 
mote and perpetuate disease, than all other diseases combined. 


i5 


Dr. William Collins of London says: “I have no faith in 
vaccination, nay, I look upon it with the greatest disgust, 
and firmly believe that it is often the medium of conveying 
many filthy and loathsome diseases from one child to another, 
and it is no protection form smallpox.” 

Dr. Robert A. Gunn, Dean of the United States Medical 
College of New York, in speaking of Medical Dogmas, has 
said:—“Of these dogmas, I believe the practice known as 
vaccination to be the most absurd and most pernicious. I do 
not believe that a single person has ever been protected from 
smallpox by it; while I know that many serious bodily evils 
and even deaths, have resulted from its employment. The 
whole theory is founded upon assumption, contrary to com¬ 
mon sense and entirely opposed to all known principles of 
physiology. Every physician of experience, has met with 
numerous cases of cutaneous eruptions, erysipelas and syph¬ 
ilis, which were directly traceable to vaccination, and if these 
cases could be collected and presented in one report, they 
would form a more terrible picture than the worst that has 
ever been drawn of the horrors of smallpox.” 

But these terrible pictures have not been left entirely to 
the vagaries of the imagination. Some years since one Dr. 
Ceely made special examinations of the results of animal 
vaccination and drew from life, several pictures of c&ses 
which presented facts having special significance. These 
pictures were subsequently reproduced on well executed 
plates in order that the exact condition might be made known 
to those of the profession who cared to investigate the matter 
and they fully justify the remark of Prof. Gunn, above quoted. 
They represented the effects of vaccinal blood poisoning and 
would be highly instructive to the general public who must 
suffer so long as vaccination is enforced by law. Truly, the 
ignorance and indifference of the masses, is the opportunity 
of the crafty and vicious. 

Francis W. Newman, Emeritus Professor of Oxford Uni¬ 
versity has said: “The doctors who advise vaccination have 
no right to be listened to with deference; for they have been 
guilty of monstrous and deadly blunders. A quarter of a 
century back they rebuked and scoffed at those who informed 
them that vaccination may propagate any or every disease 


16 


that is in the blood. To the last moment they hardened 
themselves against conviction and when no longer able to 
deny it, they showed no humility, no confession of error, no 
abashment.” 

This is a high and disinterested authority, from one 
whose knowledge of facts cannot be denied, and those who 
“advise vaccination” may feel that silence is their best de¬ 
fence to the charge. The Anti-Vaccinators are in no su^h 
dilemma and their voices should be heard. They are plead¬ 
ing the cause of the people in case of “Bodily Purity, vs. 
Blood-Contamination,” and are doing this without fee or re¬ 
ward, other than that of a consciousness of having discharged 
that duty which all men owe to the general public. 

Dr. R. Noyse, formerly Resident Surgeon of the Boston 
City Hospital, in his book entitled “Self Curability of Dis¬ 
ease,” has said: “I believe vaccination has been the greatest 
delusion that has ensnared mankind in the last three centu¬ 
ries. It originated in fraud, ignorance and error. 

It is unscientific and impracticable. It has been promo¬ 
tive of very great evil, and I cannot acredit it any good.” 

It must be admitted that Dr. Noyse had a rare opportu¬ 
nity to “Learn the lesson of experience,” and the duties of 
his office required that the standard of health be kept at the 
highest practicable point, if he would consult his own ease 
and comfort. 

A French writer, Verd de Lisle, presents a new point 
for our consideration, he says: “Vaccination hascaused men¬ 
tal and physical degeneration of the human species, dimin¬ 
ished men’s stature, incapacitated them for military service or 
even the exercise of dancing.” 

This French writer has, in a few words, drawn a true 
picture of the legitimate result of introducing into the system 
any toxic influence, whether it be pus from the heels of a 
horse, the pustules of a cow or any other poisonous matter, 
which weakens, suspends or causes erratic action of any of 
the functions of the body. When nature’s law has been in¬ 
terfered with, it is vain to speculate on the results, The 
vaccinator ignorantly or willfully takes fearful responsibilities, 
and the vaccinated must submit to the chances of certain 
malific influences; the result of which can only be foreseen 
by the eye of the Omniscience. 


17 

Dr. Edward Ballard, in his work on vaccination says: 
“Surgeon and patient should both carry in their minds the 
regulating thought that one is engaged in communicating, 
and the other in receiving into his system a real disease—as 
truly a disease, as smallpox or measles.” 

Dr. Ballard has thus clearly stated the facts in the case. 
Vaccine matter is diseased matter, possessing no power 
other than the multiplication of diseases, and there can be no 
greater crime than that of deliberately robbing an innocent 
child of its God-given birthright of purity, by engrafting its 
tender flesh with a malignant poison which checks develop¬ 
ment and entrammels its every thought and act while life 
shall last. 

The extent of this crime against child-life is not an im¬ 
aginary picture. In the English “Digest of Parliamentary 
Returns,” No. 488, Session of 1878, entitled “Vaccination 
Mortality,” we find the startling statement that: “Twenty- 
five thousand children are annually slaughtered by disease 
inoculated into the system by vaccination, and a far greater 
number are injured and maimed for life by the same unwhole¬ 
some rite.” 

Prof. Alexander Wilder, M. D., editor of the New York 
Medical Tribune, in a pamphlet entitled “Vaccination, a 
Medical Fallacy,” says: “A vaccinated people will always be 
a sickly people, short lived and degenerate.” 

Constantine Herring was a widely known medical au¬ 
thority whose works are extensively read on both sides of the 
Atlantic and whose opinion is entitled to respect, in speak¬ 
ing of vaccination has said: “I have more than once plainly 
seen, and often heard of cases where children remained ailing 
from the time of vaccination, who were previously in robust 
health.” 

Dr. J. E. Coderre, whose position as Professor of Materia 
Medica, at Victoria University, Montreal, is a sufficient guar¬ 
antee that he speaks from experience, plainly expresses his 
opinion of vaccination in the following language: “The idea 
of introducing into a healthy organism the virus of an inflam¬ 
matory and gangrenous malady, in order to keep it from dis¬ 
ease which does not exist , is revolting to commonsenseP 


8 


As early as 1805, Dr. William Rowley, an eminent Lon¬ 
don physician publicly announced that: “Out of 504 persons 
vaccinated, 75 died from the consequences. There is no 
doubt here, or question of superstition, calculation or proba¬ 
bility —it is truth!' 

According to the “Report of the Register General,’ 
London, England, the death rate, from zymotic disorders in 
London, from 1870 to 1880, was less than any preceding 
decade. The decreased mortality from fevers fell about fifty 
per cent.; scar.letina and diptheria about thirty-three per 
cent.; but smallpox gave an increase of nearly fifty per cent- 
above its previous average notwithstanding the law which 
made vaccination compulsory.” 

In the investigation made by the British Parliament in 
1871, regarding the results of vaccination, a large list of 
eminent physicians and citizens appeared and testified. 
Space forbids the giving of their testimony in full, but the 
following facts were elicited, viz.: “That vaccination leaves 
scrofula behind;—that the lymph lays the foundation for 
tubercular diseases;—that affections of the eyes, ears, throat 
and mind, have increased with vaccination;—that syphilis is 
propagated by the lancet of the vaccinators;—that it increas¬ 
es scrofular consumption and infant mortality;—that it causes 
ulcerous sores and boils of the most painful and dangerous 
character;—that it caused the appearance of a violent rash 
which ended in death;—that a healthy babe on being vacci¬ 
nated, the head became one mass of syphilitic sores, no such 
disease being in the-family;—that a healthy babe on being 
vaccinated, became a great sufferer and died at eight, the 
body being literally rotten;—that a babe of eighteen months 
had a cancer on the chin, the result of vaccination;—that a 
babe in good health before vaccination was never well there¬ 
after, its flesh rotted on the slightest scratch of a pin, fre¬ 
quently broke out into sores and died at twenty months^ 
while six other children vaccinated from this child, died ” 

Dr. Bakwell, Vaccinator General of Trinidad, who had 
been summoned before this committee, testified as follows: 
“There is a very strong opinion among medical men in the 
West Indies that leprosy has been communicated by vacci¬ 
nation. They often apply to me for lymph from England, 


9 


though there would be an equal chance of English lymph 
being contaminated by syphilis; have seen several cases of 
leprosy where vaccination seemed to be the only explanation; 
have a case now, a child from India, a leper, both parents 
being English. I saw another, a creole of Trinidad, also of 
English parents. Sir Randal Martin agreed with me that 
the leprosy arose from vaccination. I arrived at the conclu¬ 
sion with reluctance in the face of difficulties. I have no 
doubt death resulted from syphilis, produced by vaccination, 
in the Rivalta cases. There are two hundred and fifty-eight 
such cases mentioned by Lancereaux as having occurred in 
France, Italy and Germany, and I think there are others of 
which we have no knowledge.” 

Dr. Siljestrom, an eminent scientist and member of the 
Swedish Parliament says: “I have always felt that if vaccina¬ 
tion does not stand against smallpox, it is nothing; if it does 
not so stand, millions to one, but it imparts other and more 
powerful disorders into the system. My own coachman’s 
child took erysipelas concurrently with vaccination, and both 
the child and its mother, who was nursing it, who had, had 
smallpox, died of the erysipelas.” 

Dr. Mitchel, a member of the British House of Commons, 
in discussing this question said: “Vaccination has made mur¬ 
der legal, it does not protect and is followed by blindness 
and scrofula. Jennerism, is the most colossal humbug which 
the human race has been burdened with by fraud and deceit.” 

Prof. Hamernik, has said that “the practice of vaccina¬ 
tion is a disgrace to the medical profession.” 

Dr. Von Koehler, furnishes the facts regarding the in¬ 
fection of 320 children and adults, June nth, 1885, with a 
disgusting skin disease, in the Isle of Rygen, by lymph ob¬ 
tained from a government establishment. An expert com¬ 
mission to enquire into the facts of the case, who unanimous¬ 
ly reported that, “the disease was the direct consequence of 
vacccination.” 

The Lyon Medicale, of June 22nd, 1879, publishes the 
following item. “On April 26th and 28th, the local doctors 
vaccinated with animal virus, 38 children, all ages being less 
than twenty months. Whilst awaiting the incubation of the 
vaccine pustules, they perceived that they had inoculated 


20 


one of the most horrible of maladies and that they had 
been the involuntary authors of a real massacre of the inno¬ 
cents. The facts in the cases were reported to the Gazette 
d'Italia, by a gentleman who saw the victims. He said: ‘it 
appeared to be an epidemic of glanders .’ ” 

This statement from an Italian Medical Journal, becomes 
an added link in the chain of evidence which is very signifi¬ 
cant when viewed in its true light; a fact which parents 
should never forget. 

Let us review the points in the case. 

ist. Jenner’s “vaccine matter” was putrid pus which ex¬ 
udes from the heels of a horse suffering from a disease called 
“grease.” 

2nd. Grease and glanders are but two distinct manifes¬ 
tations of the same equine disease. 

3rd. This disorder known as glanders, grease or farcy ? 
is not a local, but a constitutional affection, analogous to 
that of pulmonary consumption in the human subject. 

4th. These babes were endowed by their Creator with 
health, and were entitled to paternal protections their purity, 
from that unholy Jennerian rite of blood contamination, call- i 
vaccination, against which every physical law of nature rebels. 

5th. “Local doctors,” under the pretext of “protecting” 
against a disease which did not, and could not exist in a 
healthy body, invade the sanctuary of trustful, helpless purity; 
and while uplifted, innocent eyes plead for the shelter of 
maternal arms, the contaminating lancet; in shameless, dog¬ 
matic hands, engrafts pure, sweet flesh, with one of the most 
terrible disorders known to man. 

Has any mutilator of human flesh ever before accom¬ 
plished anything more diabolical in immediate or ultimate 
effects? 

Dr. Epps who for twenty-five years was director of the 
Jenner institute, has expressed the following opinion, viz.: 

“Vaccine virus is a poison. As such it penetrates all 
organic systems. It is neither antidote nor corrigent; nor 
does it neutralize the smallpox, but only paralyzes the expan¬ 
sive power of a good constitution, so that the disease falls 
back upon the mucous membranes. Nobody has the right to 
transplant such a mischievous poison into the life of a child." 


21 


Professor Ennemoser in a communication on the subject 
of vaccination has said: “A more infernal mystification the 
world has never experienced since its existence. It is certainly 
not to be comprehended how a poison in the organism, can 
be extinguished by a similar poison.” 

But the facts are even stronger than the case stated by 
the learned professor. The vaccine virus is thrust into the 
healthy organism; and henceforth the unclean matter, through 
the law of affinity, attracts its kind and thus promotes the 
disorder it professes to prohibit. 

Professor Kranichfield, of Berlin, expresses his opinion 
in emphatic language, he says: “I, too, have vaccinated my 
children at a time when I did not know how injurious it was. 
To-day I would resist the authorities and the police law.” 

In a communication to th Medical Times , June 1st, 1852, 
Dr. Gregory, who was then Medical Director of the London 
Smallpox Hospital, said: “The idea of extinguishing the 
smallpox by vaccination, is as absurd as it is chimerical; it 
is as irrational as it is presumptuous.” 

His acts were in accordance with his opinion, as he re¬ 
fused to have his children vaccinated. 

Dr. Stowell, after twenty years’ experience as Vaccine 
Physician in England, said: “The general declaration of my 
patients enables me to proclaim that vaccination is not only 
an illusion, but a curse to humanity.” 

Dr. Collins, another Vaccine Physician , whose twenty 
years of experience in both London and Edinburgh, should 
give weight to his opinion on the subject has said: “I have 
not the least confidence in vaccination; it nauseates me, fo r 
it often transfers filthy and dangerous diseases from one to 
another, without offering any protection whatever.” 

According to Dr. Pearce who was Vaccine Physician in 
Edinburgh and London, the death rate among the smallpox 
patients of the first thirty years of the last century, was seven 
and one-half per cent.; during the last thirty years of the 
same century, and after vaccination became general, the 
death rate increased to nine and one-half per cent. 

Dr. Dongan Bird, an eminent English Physician asserts 
that: “The blood of the whole British population is saturated 
with scrofulous and tubercular diseases; which are more de- 


22 


structive to the youth and flower of the European races than 
ever were the cholera, plague, or most bloody wars of Napo¬ 
leon.” 

Perhaps the most conclusive testimony regarding vacci¬ 
nation is from the pen of Dr. L. J. Keller, who was physician- 
in-chief for the Austrian system of railways at the time of the 
epidemic of 1872-3, and therefore had the general oversight 
of 37,000 employees, with their wives and children. There 
were 2,627 cases of smallpox, of which 469 died. Dr. Keller 
draws the following conclusions from his experience during 
this epidemic. 

1st. “Generally more vaccinated than unvaccinated 
persons were attacked by smallpox.” 

2nd. “Re-vaccination did not protect from smallpox* 
and did not lessen the general mortality.” 

3rd. “Neither vaccination nor re-vaccination exercised 
any favorable influence upon the mortality of smallpox.” 

This is disinterested testimony from one who was not 
only competent to judge, but whose experience covered a 
very wide field, and thus was in possession of all facts neces¬ 
sary to form a correct opinion and whose personal interests 
required that this vast multitude of men, women and-childrem 
be kept in the best possible condition of health. 

The opinion of Dr. Keller is fully confirmed by Catlin* 
who tells us in his “History of the North American Indians,” 
that, “Among a tribe of Indians, all who were vaccinated 
during an epidemic of smallpox, died.” 

Dr. Gunn, says in reference to a report in the London 
Lancet of ten deaths from erysipelas, caused by vaccination: 
“Similar cases have been reported from almost every part of 
the United States, and the individual testimony of physicians 
in private practice, would fill volumes without exhausting the 
horrors that have been developed by vaccination.” 

Professor Pickering, of London, England, who has given 
special attention to the subject of smallpox and vaccination, 
in an address delivered before the State Committee on Public 
Health, at the State House, Boston, May 28th, 1894, said: 
“Smallpox is one of the four diseases which wrought such 
havoc some hundreds of years ago; the plague; the black 
death; the sweating sickness and smallpox. All but small- 


2 3 


pox were eradicated, and that would have been, had it not 
been kept alive by vaccination.” 

At the close of the address, Professor Pickering assured 
the committee that, ‘.‘The Boston Smallpox Hospital, could 
be cleared of infection in ten days. That eighty per cent, of 
its patients could be cured within six hours, and ten per cent, 
additional within twelve hours.” 

The National Board of Health, of Washington, D. C., 
under date of March 4th, 1882, reports the following from 
Thomasville, Ga.: “The town authorities appointed a physi¬ 
cian to vaccinate all who presented themselves for the pur¬ 
pose. The virus was procured from the New England Vac¬ 
cine Company, Chelsea, Mass., as ‘bovine matter.’ The 
result has been fearful. Nearly every one vaccinated has 
suffered severely from erysipelas or erythema; the arm swol¬ 
len from shoulder to wrist and the point of puncture present¬ 
ing the appearance of a sloughing ulcer, discharging freely 
sanious pus.” 

There is nothing more sacred than the helplessness of 
early childhood. To rob a sweet and innocent babe of its 
divine inheritance of purity is the most heinous of all crimes. 
Verily the sum of all wickedness seems to be concentrated 
into this one Jennerian dogma of vaccination. 

It entrammels the vital powers by filling the system with 
a stagnating poison at a time when nature demands vigorous, 
vital action, and pure nourishment. It retards and perverts 
functional activity and introduces discord where the fiat of 
the Creator had prescribed harmony. 

It is through this condition of functional inharmony that 
the nidus is provided for the infecting germ, and in which 
incubation takes place. 

We have seen that vaccine virus usually develops 
zymotic affections but its course is always uncertain, and often 
causes secret, internal disorders to which the stomach and 
bowels are peculiarly suceptible. 

Dr. DeTerze, of Paris, has expressed the opinion that: 
“Typhus, scrofula and tubercles, are transformed, internal 
smallpox.” 

Epidemic smallpox which was so severe in the seven¬ 
teenth century, seemed to have reached its highest point in 


24 


r 779~8o, and had nearly disappeared at the beginning of the 
eighteenth century, but was succeeded by a species of typhu . 
called Variola intestinalis which proved even more destruc¬ 
tive than its kindred and preceding disorder. 

It is self-evident that vaccination has not only perpetua¬ 
ted smallpox but it has so contaminated the system that it is 
more easily invaded by other destructive elements of disease 
Even the teeth are not exempt. 

Professor Winterburn, in his most excellent work on 
vaccination says: “Children vaccinated during the period of 
dentition, often suffer from diarrhoea, and frequently the 
tooth-making process is interfered with and the teeth are 
imperfectly developed, or are subject to early decay.” 

Dr. William L. Johnson, of Newburyport, Mass., well 
known for his labors in the matter of diet reform, and the 
inventor of the “Educator” crackers; in a letter to “The New¬ 
buryport News,” on the subject of vaccination says: “It has 
been ascertained that in all countries where vaccination is 
unknown, the decay of the teeth is unknown, and in all coun¬ 
tries where it is practiced, the teeth rot.” He further says: 
“My five children were all exposed to smallpox, and the 
only one who took the disease, was the only one who had 
been vaccinated.” 

This adds one more to the almost innumerable cases 
which show that vaccination impairs the ctfhstitutional integ¬ 
rity and thus provides congenial conditions for the develop¬ 
ment of the very disease we desire to stamp out. 

In 1855, a commissioner was appointed by the British 
Parliament to procure the opinion of eminent physicians re¬ 
garding vaccination. Out of some five hundred answers, two 
hundred and sixteen subscribed to the following objections: 

1st. “It endangers life.” 

2nd. “It nurses and develops latent diseases.” 

3rd. “Children frequently do not thrive so well after* 
as before vaccination, especially during teething, change of 
teeth and puberty.” 

4th. “It introduces new diseases into the body of the 
patient.” 

Dr. Winterburn, in his work on vaccination says: ‘Up¬ 
wards of nine hundred of well attested cases (of invaccinated 


25 

syphilis), are on record; and when it is remembered with 
what difficulty even a single case can be indubitably sustained, 
the mind realizes the probability of thousands which have 
been overlooked or ignored. My own dispensary experience 
leads me to aver that a systematic, impartial, Governmental 
investigation would reveal an undreamt of multitude of cases.” 
But he adds, very significantly: “Such an investigation will 
never be permitted.” 

While writing, we learn of “A smallpox epidemic in the 
East.” A correspondent of the “Homeopathic World,” writ¬ 
ing from Calcutta, says: “More than six thousand cases of 
smallpox have already occurred in this city since the begin¬ 
ning of February, 1895, of which seventy per cent, were fatal. 
Almost all the people are vaccinated from virus of cowpox 
and we regret that this vaccination does not prevent the 
attacks.” 

This testimony proves: 

1st. That vaccination, a la Jenner, does not protect. 

2nd. That the blood of “almost all the people,” has 
been contaminated, and their constitutional integrity has 
been impaired. 

3rd. In this weakened condition, due functional action - 
of the entire system becomes impossible. 

4th. This weakness of the system is the enemies’ op¬ 
portunity for implanting the germs of disease and the body 
is thus converted into a perfect smallpox incubator. The 
work of the destroyer is further assisted by the climate and 
uncleanly habits. 

Enough has been said to show that only evil can result 
from the introduction of rotten pus into a healthy body, and 
it might flatter our vanity if we could lay all the blame to the 
ignorance of the dark ages, but we cannot thus escape the 
condemnation of future generations. Our statute books are 
still encumbered with infamous laws enforcing blood-poison¬ 
ing of innocent children, although we may charge the fram¬ 
ing of these laws to those who have no higher calling to the 
medical profession than the dollars it may yield to cupidity, 
we are all responsible for their continuance, and future gen¬ 
erations will point to them as a blot and a legalized crime. 


2 6 


No candid and intelligent person can investigate this 
subject without a feeling of mingled horror and indignation 
that this system of blood-poisoning should have been made 
compulsory in this land of boasted freedom, and it may be 
well to enquire into the peculiar nature of the influence, by 
which a law could be enacted which, according to Doctor 
Mitchel of the British House of Commons, “Has made mur¬ 
der legal’” 

It may be said that all men have a right to their private 
opinions, and this would be true, if the question was of a pri¬ 
vate and doubtful nature, but no man has a right to maintain 
an opinion which is contrary to both common sense and well 
known facts. Such an opinion would be prevarication, pure 
and simple. 

The facts in the case are overwhelming in their conclu¬ 
siveness; all pointing to that which Sir Thomas Watson of 
England, called: “An ugly blot.” But the contamination of 
the blood of the whole human race is more than this; it is a 
crime without parallel against the physical purity of God’s 
children; a violation of the God-given rights of man, and the 
Rev. Dr. Francis Wayland has told us that: “The rights of 
man are as truly rights, as the rights of God; and their vio¬ 
lation is as truly a violation of right, as the violation of the 
rights of God.” 

That temple in which God has placed a living soul, 
should be a sanctuary not to be invaded by the poisoned 
arrow of the savage, nor the poisoned lancet of ignorance, 
superstition or venality. 

Dr. S. B. Munn, of Waterbury, Conn., has said: “If med¬ 
ical men were made responsible for ill effects, no physician 
would ever vaccinate.” 

This remark is directly to the point and worthy a prac¬ 
tical test. The statuatory protection which the people need 
is not against the ordinary chances of disease, but the cer¬ 
tainty of disorders transferred by the lancet of the charlitan, 

Dr. Winterburn has told us that: “Medical men are no 
better, and never have been any better than the public de¬ 
mand,” and the best way to quicken the professional con¬ 
science is to make them strictly responsible for the results of 
professional acts, “By their fruits ye shall know them.” 


2 ; 


We hold the architect strictly responsible for his acts, 
but his blunders seldom involve more than pecuniary losses. 
Is life and health less sacred than dollars and cents? 

Medical men say, and in private conversation, often do 
exhibit a degree of moral obtuseness, but there are few who 
would not shrink from publishing to the world the evidence 
of their moral obliquity. 

The following extract is from an article on “Certificates 
of Death,” written by Dr. Henry May, and published in the 
January number of the “Medical Review,” 1874. The writer 
says: “In certificates given by us voluntarily, and to which 
the public have access, it is scarcely to be expected that a 
medical man will give opinions which may tell against, or 
reflect upon himself in any way, or which are likely to cause 
annoyance or injury to the survivors. In such cases he will 
most likely tell the truth, and assign some prominent symp- 
ton of the disease as the cause of death. As instances 
which may tell against the medical man himself, I will men¬ 
tion erysipelas from vaccmation , and puerperal fever . A death 
from the first cause occurred not long ago in my practice, 
and although I had not vaccinated the child, yet in my desire 
to preserve vaccination from reproach, 1 omitted all mentio?i 
of it in my certificate of death." 

In this statement we*have two important facts, viz.: 

1st. That vaccination caused erysipelas and death. 

2nd. That in his “desire to preserve vaccination from 
reproach,” the learned doctor was willing to misrepresent 
facts, and by so doing betray the confidence reposed in him 
by his patron and the general public. Is this the ethical 
standard of a learned and scientific gentleman, or the craft of 
an ignorant tradesman, harrassed by the avarice of some 
greedy employer? 

The legal maxim, falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus, might 
with propriety be applied to those who deceive patrons and 
falsify records to save a medical dogma from deserved 
reproach. 

The author of the foregoing quotation is probably no 
more blameworthy than many others who are active and un¬ 
scrupulous promoters of the Jennerian theories, but we sub¬ 
mit that this quotation may be a fair expose of the ethics of 


2 8 


that class of medical practitioners who “desire to preserve 
vaccination from reproach.” That they have deliberately 
falsified the records is well known, but their motive for so 
doing may not be as thoroughly understood by the public as 
it should be. 

Dr. Maclean, a well known medical authority of the early 
part of the present century, therefore contemporary with 
Jenner has said: “It will be thought incumbent on the vac¬ 
cinators to come forward and disprove the numerous facts 
decisive against vaccination stated on unimpeachable author¬ 
ity, or make the amend honorable by a manly recantation. 
But experience forbids us to expect any such fair and mag¬ 
nanimous proceeding, and we may be assured that, under no 
circumstances, will they abandon so lucrative a practice, 
until the practice abandons them" 

Dr. Gunn, says: “There is a vaccination ring in England, 
receiving millions of the public money. It is in their interest 
to favor the practice at all hazards and to falsify statistics in 
order to conceal its failure and its evils. There are also 
armies of public vaccinators in every large city all over Eu¬ 
rope, who are supported from the public treasury, and every 
practitioner who does not oppose the practice, derives a con¬ 
siderable income from its continuance.” 

According to the “Herald of Health,” “Ten millions of 
dollars are paid to physicians in England, annually, which 
would not be paid, if the law did not enforce vaccination.” 

These remarks are equally applicable to our own country. 
The capital invested in the manufacture of vaccine virus 
(poison) would become a complete loss as soon as the dia¬ 
bolical nature of the business is fully exposed. We have 
also here, as well as in Europe, an army of public and private 
vaccinators whose profits from this blood-contaminating pro¬ 
cess may be estimated to be fully equal to that paid in En¬ 
gland, and our political experience would seem to indicate 
that a much smaller sum than ten million would tempt 
vicious and unscrupulous, when they know that the law will 
shield them from all personal responsibility. 

Notwithstanding the injurious results of the process, we 
have a large army of legally protected practitioners who are 
strenuously advocating annual vaccination, legally enforced. 


29 


Their motive will be clearly understood when we consider 
the fees. With 60,000,000 of people to be annually vaccina¬ 
ted, even at the low rate of fifty cents per capita, we have the 
enormous tax of $30,000,000., to be levied annually for the 
special benefit of impecunious practitioners. They pocket 
the profits, and the people suffer the consequences. The bet¬ 
ter class—the scientific class of medical men—as a rule, do 
not vaccinate, and those who do, exact the surgeon’s fee, and 
thus the grand total of this vicious tax, if strictly enforced, 
would greatly exceed the above mentioned sum. Add to 
this the cost of the multifarious ailments resulting from this 
unwholesome rite, and we shall find in this one word “ vacci¬ 
nation , ' the heaviest burden the human race has ever been 
called upon to endure. 

We have already exceeded our intended limits in this 
discussion, and the testimony produced may appear unneces¬ 
sarily cumulative. The subject, however, is one of vital 
interest to all, and we have made no quotations we did not 
deem important. We have by no means exhausted the tes¬ 
timony at command, and, for lack of space, we have been 
Compelled to omit many interesting and important facts. 
For the present we will rest our case against the custom of 
vaccination on the testimony offered. There is one more 
modern custom which is so intimately connected with this 
subject that we should feel it to be a neglect of duty to pass 
it as ships pass in the night,—without note of cargo or course. 
We allude to the mania for inoculating the human body with 
specific, toxic matter which obstructs and paralyzes, instead 
of stimulating vital functions with proper nutriton. 

Prof, Koch was a man of experience in bacterial research. 
His error consisted in his practical application of the knowl¬ 
edge attained. His theories were defective, and his attempt 
to cure the disease called consumption by the injection of 
what Dr. S. G. Dickson has told us is “one of the most power¬ 
ful poisons known” was an error in judgment, fully as con¬ 
spicuous as that of Dr. jenner. The disastrous consequences, 
however, were limited by the early discovery of the danger¬ 
ous and useless character of the experiments, and the Koch 
mania is fast dying out. 


30 


Pasteurism, or inoculation for hydrophobia, is another rite 
of the samegenesisas Jennerism, and by which many innocent 
persons have been hurried into eternity. According to sta¬ 
tistics published by the “Anti Vivisection Society,” of Lon¬ 
don, sixty-three persons had died in consequence of treatment 
by Pasteur’s system, within the two years preceding March, 
1887, an d M. Zutland, Editor of the “ Journal de Medicine ,” 
says: “Pasteur does not cure rabies, but gives it by inoculation 

The lessons of the past would seem to be sufficient to 
prove that inoculated or injected disease, is as truly a disease 
as that arising from other causes, but we find that each 
decade brings into public view men with more physical 
energy than mental acumen, and who prefer an unsavory 
notoriety to common-place obscurity. When such people 
drift into the medical profession, they often attempt some 
new application of an exploded theory. 

At the present time anti-toxine seems to be the special 
sensation of the medical world, and the thoughtless accept¬ 
ance of this treatment for diptheria, exposes the careless 
recklessness of many members of the profession, and goes 
far to prove the truth of the old adage that “Physicians are 
born—not made.” 

The subject has been brought into unpleasant notoriety 
by the recent report in the New York papers of the sudden 
death of a young man in Brooklyn after one injection of anti- 
toxine. Virchow, of Berlin, had condemned the practice, 
and the fatal result from the Brooklyn experiment has aroused 
the public to the dangers of the practice, and those of the 
profession who have become compromised by the advocacy 
of the use of anti-toxine have made hot haste to defend 
themselves. 

At a recent meeting of the medical men of New York, 
five papers were read in praise of anti-toxine. At the close 
of the reading of the last essay, Dr. Joseph E. Winters arose 
and said that for three months he had studied its effects care¬ 
fully in the Williard Parker Hospital, but had failed to find a 
single case where it had a healthy influence on diptheria. 
“On the contrary,” he continued, “I have found many where 
death has been due directly to the use of the drug.” He 
refused to believe the statistics of the anti-toxine advocates, 


3i 


among which he included those of Dr. Briggs of the New 
York Board of Health, and he warned the public against 
submitting to anti-toxine inoculation. 

In a subsequent communication to the “Medical Record,” 
Dr. Winters said: 

“I oppose the anti-toxine treatment of diptheria— 

ist. Because in an experience of one hundred and fifty- 
four cases, during the months of January, February and 
March, 1895, in the Williard Parker Hospital, I have failed 
to see the slightest evidence that it neutralized the toxaemia 
in a single case. I have never found that it exerted the 
slightest influence for good in a single clinical manifestation 
of the disease on membrane, pulse, temperature, gland swell¬ 
ing, laryngeal symptoms, etc. Every one of these cases 
vvere examined daily, with great care and solicitude, and 
with the desire to discover some evidence of the virtues as¬ 
cribed to anti-toxine by others. 

2nd. I oppose it on account of its immediate danger to 
life, through its influence on the kidneys and on the nervous 
system, and, remotely, through its influence on the blood.” 

Doctors are not miracle workers; cures, if effected, 
must be through a wise co-operation with hygienic law. 
Nothing but evil comes through constitutional impairment. 
The Jenner lymph, is diseased matter which transmits dis¬ 
ease; the Koch poison has accomplished the deadly work of 
its nature; Pasteurism duplicates the injury first inflicted by 
the teeth of the brute—both by inoculation; and anti-toxine 
is now being foiced upon the people in defiance of God’s 
laws of life and healtn. 

“A corrupt tree cannot bring forth good fruit.” 

In conclusion we would appeal to the people to investi¬ 
gate this subject, and we feel assured that those who do so, 
will recognize the true cause of much of their sufferings, and 
the almost innumerable taxes which disease has imposed up¬ 
on them, and henceforth exert every power to save their 
innocent children from further contamination by vaccination, 
inoculation, or other kindred rites. To protect your children 
you must repeal the “vaccination laws,” and enact more 
stringent laws against malpractice, which shall be available 
to the poorest as well as the wealthiest citizens, To accom- 


32 


plish this you must see that no man enters the next legisla 
ture that is not pledged to support these measures of reform 








0 




* 




( 1 , ; } i 








